Nordelnob

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    46

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Nordelnob

  2. Posted

    21 hours ago, Ford said:

    Here's a quick theory on the end of episodes 17-18. In episode 17 when Cooper's face superimposes against the screen it represents a split in time. We are allowed to see one of these splits play out with Cooper going back to the lodge with the purpose of fulfilling his plan to save Laura and find Judy (two birds-one stone). Going into the lodge he remembers the Fireman's clues (430, Richard and Linda, Two birds one stone). He eventually travels (as Cooper) the 430 miles to some rip in time. When he enters the rip in time, he and Diane split. This is evidenced by Diane seeing another image of herself and the fact that at the hotel Cooper says things could change. In the hotel, we no longer are seeing Cooper - it is Richard. Richard doesn't remember the things the Giant told him, this is why he is so baffled by the note left in the morning. He only has a vague memory of himself, and some conditioned objective to find "Laura Palmer". We see Richard's personality change in the hotel, because he is a different person. Eventually they wind up at Laura's house and the ending. What we don't see, is that "Richard", conditioned to find Judy, and having already found Laura, will continue to lose his identity as Cooper and end up being Mr. C who will go back into the lodge and become Mr. C. Mr. C who has a conditioned need to find Judy for some unknown reason, which is a remnant of Cooper's original plan.

    Oh god damn it. I kind of love this.

    I always thought the dopples were just some inherent shadow form that everyone has though. I guess that could be wrong though.

  3. Posted

    3 minutes ago, LostInTheMovies said:

     

    Don't forget the second version of Dougie (who seems pretty different from the first) who returns to Janey-E and Sonny Jim at the beginning of pt18!

    Happy Coop! Or as I like to call him Dougie 2.0

    He seems to be the part of Cooper that is his wonder and almost childlike curiosity about everything around him. The side of Cooper who asked Truman about the trees in the first episode.

  4. Posted

    1 hour ago, SkullKid said:

    The thing that's really stuck in my head is the image of Diane seeing herself at the motel after Cooper walked inside. Since this purgatorial place seems to take place outside of time, maybe multiple versions of oneself can exist. Maybe a Bad Cooper walked out of that motel and got in the car with that Diane, whereas a Good Cooper (though one still not entirely in control of his mental faculties) walked out and got in a different car with that *other* Diane. The sex scene we see features Bad Coop, whereas somewhere off screen, another Coop and Diane share a similar romantic moment. Basically, the Coop we see wake up in the morning and yell for Diane is not the same Coop that we saw in the sex scene. 

     

    It's as if the same thing keeps happening in this same place over and over, in slightly different ways. 

     

    But probably not. I feel like there's a simple answer to all this buried underneath Lynch's artistic flourishes. 

    I wouldn't dismiss it so fast. I've gotten the same or a very similar feeling. This entire season seems to have been about multiple or alternate realities/dimensions/planes of existence. And there seem to be little hints. Particularly whenever two shots dissolve and overlap and separate from each other (this happens quite often when there is some otherworldly force nearby or important cosmic events, etc.., for instance when Cooper asked Freddy if he was Freddy). When the minute hand on the clock in the Sheriff's station went both backwards and forwards and they did that dissolve where both shots are on top of each other. It seems to imply that the two realities that are supposed to by one are diverging. The literal world where things runs forwards, and the dream world where at least in the lodge, things seem to run backwards. And there have been a couple that I've noticed with Cooper.

     

    12 minutes ago, LostInTheMovies said:

    This is a good point, because when Cooper awoke in the hospital and was very apparently the full character we knew from s1/s2 I thought, "Well there goes the (more interesting to me) idea that good and evil Cooper are both parts of a singular whole." But maybe in a way the Cooper we're seeing in Pt. 18 is the "real" Coop to the extent "real" has meaning in a show that blurs so many boundaries? Only real counter to this idea is that in s2 they were already trying to show Coop as a flawed individual leading up to his downfall in the finale.

    I doesn't quite wash literally. But thematically it kind of makes sense.

  6. Posted

    1 hour ago, The Great Went said:

     I don't know if it's my computer or what but it looked a whole lot not like teenage Laura Palmer and I just figured they CGI'd "youth filter" on Sheryl Lee's face. IMO when teenage Laura Palmer talks to Cooper it was the weakest part of the episode to me, and one of the more over-the-top-but-not-clearing-the-hurdle visual effects. I was bummed that Cooper tried to save Laura, it seemed very naive for a guy who had been through what he'd been through -- and yeah, I guess now I don't understand if he actually Back To The Future'd all of Twin Peaks or not. 

    Yeah, she was wearing some pretty baggy clothes which probably did a descent job of covering up the weight. And they digitally de-aged her face I'm guessing. De-aging has come a long way since X-men 3 LOL. The fact that it's a dark scene probably goes a long way in making it pretty seamless as well. and things like keeping her out of focus (and the fact the scene was shot mostly in black and white). It all cut together pretty seamlessly I thought. I wasn't exactly looking for seams or anything though.

  7. Posted

    I was just watching the episode again and something about the dead man caught my attention. The bullet wound seems to angle upwards, which means it may possibly be a suicide. 

    I just thought that was strange because there has been speculation about how Becky was sort of a stand in or a "reincarnation" for Laura. And Steven shot himself.


    Or maybe it's nothing. It's probably nothing. 

     

    Also, they use the same "Lost Highway" Mr. C driving at night shot when "real" Cooper is driving. Almost like they are hitting us over the head with the fact that Bad Coop is now a part of Cooper. Well, that and all of the other clues. His behavior. The ruthless way he dispatched those guys in the diner. That sex scene.

    But the theory about Cooper giving up his innocent, chipper side when he created Dougie 2.0 seems just as plausible to me.

    I really want to believe that these are all meaningful clues, and that it's all going to build to something, hopefully we get another season.

  8. Posted

    7 minutes ago, Mentalgongfu said:

    @Nordelnob

     

    I'd agree the tone was empty, down or depressing; I just can't agree that it was supposed to leave me feeling the same way, because it didn't exactly do that. It mostly left me feeling ponderous. 

     

    @UnpopularTrousers 

    Personally, I'm trying not to dissect the intent beyond any meaning I can grasp for myself. But I am admittedly a little annoyed at the idea that has been spread throughout the season by some posters, not necessarily those at this site, that The Return was just an intentional troll. And that might come across in some of my posts. I think it's the only interpretation I would bother to argue against. It bothers me because it assumes both the intent of the artist and that any viewer who liked it is just a "fanboy," a mark who will buy whatever Lynch is selling, regardless of its value, and implies a superiority on the part of the viewer who is dissatisfied compared to someone whose reaction is more positive.

     

    The choice need not be binary, and shouldn't be. I loved The Return, but I won't know how I feel about the ending for a while. I loved the sweeping scene. I loved Wally Brando, and I came to love Dougie. But that's me. Being bored or upset, or feeling there was wasted time is just as valid a reaction, even though it's not mine. Thinking all 18 hours was just meant as a big middle finger to the audience is probably a valid reaction too, but it's one that I disagree with strongly enough to argue about. 

    I gotcha. I may have phrased that poorly. I suppose what feeling people take away from it is going to vary a lot more than your average TV show.

    This season was certainly not a troll. David Lynch is just a weird guy. A very, very weird guy.

    I have thoroughly enjoyed The Return. I'm posting on this forum after all. I'm engaged and interested in these characters. The way I feel about the finale, I have felt several times about other moments/episodes this season. And some of them my feelings have changed. And of course some of them haven't. If I can say anything about it though, almost every scene has been good, even if some of them didn't seem to serve much of a purpose to the overall story, or character development. That David Lynch knows how to put together a good scene, whether it's comedic or horrific. And he knows how to create a compelling mystery. Paying them off or resolving them is another question! Lynch seems to be allergic to that!

  9. Posted

    7 minutes ago, UnpopularTrousers said:

    I actually thought something was totally off about the behind-the-back Jack Nance body double on the dock. It actually took me out of it for a second because, like you, I thought it couldn't possibly be that hard to find someone who looks close enough from behind.

    I didn't notice that, but I was pretty impressed by all of the other stuff. I was trying to figure out how they did it. It seemed like they either had a bunch of stuff that they filmed and never used with Laura, or maybe they did a face switch on another actress? I'm not sure.

  10. Posted

    3 minutes ago, UnpopularTrousers said:

    I feel like people are talking about somewhat different things here. The 'true' intent of a work of art can never truly be known. Even if the artist tells you, they may be lying. The 'true' meaning of a work of art can never be known. Some would argue that even the artist can't speak definitively about this. Art is created independently of the person consuming it, but it is also in a sense interactive because you bring your own interpretations and meanings to it. There are also very smart people who would argue that everything I just said is wrong. All of this can/his/will be debated forever.

     

    But is any of that stuff actually what y'all are talking about? Or are people just displeased that the meaning and intent some people are projecting doesn't line up with their own projections? I feel like people only argue that you can't possibly speak of intent when that intent doesn't match with their own assumptions. 

    True. But this doesn't just negate objective reality. There is such a thing as bad writing (and I'm not saying this is necessarily bad writing, I'm just giving an example) and it's a completely valid thing to criticize or discuss that type of thing. That's pretty much what we do here on this forum.

    When someone criticizes art, just saying "well, art is subjective" is a bit of a non starter. Kind of shuts down the conversation.

    When a painter uses the color red, that's an objective fact.

    When a film maker uses spooky music for example to create an atmosphere, whether he's subverting expectations or playing to them, there's an established "flavor" or "palette" that is being used.

  11. Posted

    16 minutes ago, Mentalgongfu said:

     

    Is it? Is the perception of the viewer = to the intent of the artist?

     

    If someone, like myself, was not left feeling empty, does that mean I just missed the intent and couldn't grasp that I was supposed to be left feeling empty?

    You  are speaking as if your own personal reaction must be what Lynch wanted. That's not necessarily the case, and it devalues the reaction of anyone else to claim that must have been the intent. 

     

    I don't feel empty or sour. I do have a lot of unanswered questions, but I knew no matter what happened in the final two hours this was something that would not be easily digested or dissected afterward. I'm still not sure where I'll land in my final evaluation, but Game of Thrones pissed me off a lot more this summer than Twin Peaks did, and I had a lot more enjoyment with the latter than the former. 

     

    Also, people keep talking about the season 2 ending as an example of David Lynch leaving strings hanging and giving a middle finger to the audience, which seems to forget that he had originally expected a third season of the show, and failing that, to have a series of movies to elaborate on the ideas rather than just Fire Walk With Me. 

     

    edit: Thanks @UnpopularTrousers

    Whether you can find a way to make the events that happened hopeful in some way is one thing. But the entire tone of the that last episode was deliberately empty and maybe there's a better adjective... down, depressing. Coop is now no longer the happy vibrant person he was. Diane is having rape trauma and leaves him. We get these long lingering, eerie shots that seem to be be conjuring a sense of dread. The whole last episode felt like a horror movie. I can't believe this is even being disputed. (granted a lot of the season has felt like that. But it has had it's more hopeful moments.)

    Mind you, I'm not making any judgements as to whether any of that was a good way to do it, or a bad way to do it. I'm honestly still processing it. If that's the last Twin Peaks we ever get, then much like the S2 finale, I think at the very least there will be a lot to talk about.

    But I am still just curious about why they made that choice. In the case of S2 they were clearly setting up the next season. But I think they knew this could be it, and they chose to end it on a downer (particularly tonally, but story-wise I think you can find things to be down or feel empty about too), while deliberately dropping almost every important plot thread that they've set up for 17 episodes. Like I said I'm still processing it, but it is an interesting choice (to say the least!)

  12. Posted

    16 minutes ago, Mentalgongfu said:

    This is perhaps a little off topic, but of the all the people who are feeling jaded at the finale, Julee Cruise is with you. Apparently she was none too happy about the ending and/or the limited role of her song in the finale and her general treatment by Lynch and Co. She was posting about it last night on Facebook, and the Obnoxious and Anonymous guys were reading some of it on their live stream. There are some quotes in a short article over at alternative nation. 

    I wouldn't exactly consider myself one of jaded or disappointed people really. This empty feeling that I'm left with is 100% the intent of the finale. And I knew it could likely end with another cliffhanger or at least a lot of unanswered questions. But I am curious as to why Lynch left it on such a sour, hopeless, and almost nihilistic (and in some ways solipsistic) note. Especially considering it would likely be the last episode ever.

  13. Posted

    20 minutes ago, BonusWavePilot said:

     

    This was a disturbing scene.  The way I took it was that Diane recognised the change in Cooper since they had 'crossed over', and this is what was disturbing her - hence her attempts to cover RichardCoop's face.  (Or alternatively, if she was looking at it from the other side, she was alarmed by the change in Richard)

    Equally likely.

    I find myself a bit frustrated in general with this finale, and I'm sure in some way that's part of the point.. I'm just kind of a little bit.. bummed. I enjoyed the hell out of this season, including the finale. But the way it ended feels so empty, and devoid of any meaning. I'm sure that's 100% by design. I'm just not sure I understand why. I realize Twin Peaks isn't always a feel good romp. But in the past it did tackle MEANINGFUL issues/themes/moods, and could often be very hopeful.

    Things like Harry and Cooper's friendship, and Cooper's unstoppable drive to do good. Redemption of characters like Bobby Briggs. And just about everything Major Briggs ever said was uplifting or enlightening in some way.

    We haven't had much of that this season. I was really expecting the finale to drive some of that stuff home. But instead we are left with a sense of dread and despair. And the world is now just an ugly, grey place.  I'm trying to figure out why I am surprised by this, given the way the original was left. But I always attributed that to the show being cancelled before it could resolve the cliffhanger. Not a deliberate attempt to leave a sour taste.


     

  14. Posted

    1 hour ago, Urthman said:

     

    I wonder if that was meant to be Diane's perspective?  No matter how glad Diane was to be with the real Cooper, it seems hard to believe she could kiss him or have sex with him without having traumatic thoughts about Bad Coop. Cooper could have been grinning like Dougie when they were having sex, and she might still see Bad Coop's face.  It was frightening the way she was completely covering his face with her hands.

    This seems likely. Diane is traumatized for life. As much as she completely LOVES Cooper with all of her heart, having sex with someone who looks identical to your rapist is probably not the best thing to do.

  15. Posted

    2 hours ago, Digger said:

    It's hard to know what Leland was or would have been, having been inhabited by BOB since he was a child.  BOB in evil Coop is a different entity.  In evil Coop he doesn't hide (although Coop does not always seem aware of his presence- see the "I'm glad you're still with me scene early in the season).  Evil Coop and BOB seem to be working together BOB happily feeding off the mayhem Mr. C provides. It also seems he lend Mr. C some kind of power or enhancement with his presence, and possibly helped him create the tulpas in the first place.  

    I think this actually supports my point even more. Leland was doomed from the beginning. He never even had a chance of resisting BOB since he was taken over so early in life when he was so vulnerable. To me, that kind of implies that he was tainted by BOB's influence and it had many many years to influence him. And yet despite that, they go out of their way in both show and FWWM to show how he was a good father and generally a gpod person.  

     

    Laura was, as far as we know, already basically grown by the time BOB began to feed on her darker urges. 

     

    Imagine being a child and being confronted with this god like entity of BOB. How can a child even be expected to comprehend let alone resist such a powerful force.

     

    He was flawed, yes. He was a bit of a slippery lawyer type who worked with people who weren't exactly Ghandi  but deep down he had a "heart of gold". 

  16. Posted

    On 8/31/2017 at 2:41 AM, dartmonkey said:

    I agree that perhaps BOB's influence has changed - the season 2 ending very explicitly highlighted his presence in the doppelgänger - but the 'good man like Leland' interpretation is something I disagree with. Chris and Jake have discussed it on the 'cast (and people on the forums too) and there's no evidence to say Leland is blameless and 'good'. If BOB is a manifestation of the 'evil that men do', it is (WO)MEN that must create conditions for him to exist in them. He's not a bogeyman who inhabits hapless innocents. He couldn't inhabit Laura, for example, although there are scenes where she appears to be succumbing to that evil (when she's on the stairway in FWWM) and at risk of letting him in.

     

    My immediate thought (and I guess that of many viewers) on watching the S2 finale was that BadCoop and BOB would begin a spree of devious, violent attacks, starting with Annie and probably moving through the entire Miss Twin Peaks lineup. I think FWWM and S3 introduced more subtle and complicated motivations for BadCoop and BOB, and it would be a shame if the audiences' assumptions were indulged rather than being subverted in any way.

    If Leland would have raped Laura anyways without being possessed by BOB, then I just don't see the point of BOB in the first place. I get that there are metaphorical things to consider, and the point is we all have darkness.. But is doesn't mean you are bad just because you are human with a dark side.. we all have darkness in us... And the issue isn't purely black and white.

     

    But BOB is a part of the story, and it has to mean something. Yes the real Leland would sometimes push his way to the surface, but he wasn't the purpotrator, Bob was. Or at least, the real Leland would not have done those things.. 

     

    Unless you want to claim that Dale Cooper is also deep down a monster just because HIS darker aspect is capable of the things his Doppleganger did. Dale Cooper is probably the most noble person ever, and even he is susceptible to the corruption in some way.. He is seemingly incorruptible and yet Mr. C exists.. I think it's missing the point to blame Leland when he obviously was not himself.. whatever metaphorical thing you want to take from it all.

     

    The entire point is THAT HE IS GOOD and he was still made to do these things.   This is the point of showing the real Leland shining through occasionally so you can see the tragedy of a good man who loves his family  being made to do horrible things . If he was a rotten egg to begin with,  Bob is kind of redundant .

  17. Posted

    3 hours ago, plasticflesh said:

    Some speculations on the tulpa / lodge spirit / doppleganger cosmology.

     

    Giant Fireman and company created a golden orb that had Laura Palmer's face on it. This golden orb resembles the tulpa seed. Does this mean the "spirit of Laura Palmer" is Tulpa-like in nature? Or perhaps that meant that tulpa-seed was encoded to inhabit Laura Palmer, and 

     

    In the nuclear explosion, the Mother entity vomits eggs and weird clay blobs, which has the Bob Face on it. Is this how the Bob lodge spirit first enters Earth?

     

    Or rather that a Tupla-seed can enter earth realm and possess earth people, such as Laura Palmer. Perhaps having a Tulpa-seed created by Fireman and company possessed Laura Palmer and prevented her from being possessed by Bob.

     

    Perhaps the Laura Tulpa-seed-spirit bounced around after Laura's death, a for example briefly inhabits Donna- Causing Sarah to mistake Laura for Donna in Season 1 Episode 2-ish.

     

    When Tulpa's are created by evil Dopplegangers or Lodge Spirits, it's a Tulpa AND a tainted thing of evil. When Diane-tulpa and Dougie-tulpa are deflated in the red room, they both exhaust deathly black smoke and tarry floating blob that causes Mike to cover his eyes. Perhaps it's too bright for Mike to look at, but perhaps it's also too evil for Mike to look at.

     

    Perhaps Tulpa-seeds that inhabit humans, like Laura Palmer, or that are created by non-evil or from non-evil, like whatever Cooper instructs Mike to make, will not contain the tarry insides of a Booper-and-Bob-made-Tulpa.

     

    I'm also of the opinion the Jumping Man is the Mother entity. I'm also of the opinion that Jumping Man / Mother "has a light," when Sarah takes her face off before biting Truck You, there's is a "spark spark" sound effect like she is lighting a cigarette. 

     

    I feel like the interpretation Lynch is going for is that WE ARE ALL TULPAS in a way, since we were all created from a thought. Every single being that exists is just a creation that was thought up from something else and when you go all the way back to the source, be it The Fireman or God or the Mother or whatever, it still boils down to the same thing. I truly believe that is the entire purpose of showing the golden orbs in the first place. There is fundamentally no difference between Laura and one of the Tulpas, except who or what spawned them. The one who spawned everything, the dreamer, is essentially God. Whether reality is a dream or some mystical thing, or a computer program, or whether there are purely mechanical answers is up for debate I guess. 

    And that makes the distinction between tulpas, dopplegangers, and Laura/BOB moot in a way. The only real difference is that Tulpas come from other people, humans that we already "know" exist. It seems the further down you go, Tulpas coming from Dopplegangers, the more dim and less conscious they are, possibly because they are further away from the source and have less pure consciousness within them(which is probably why Laura and BOB's orbs seem to be much bigger. they are made from more metaphysical "stuff" than those tiny tulpa orbs).

    I appreciate the fact that this will probably not be explicitly spelled out for us, and Agent Cole's Monica Bellucci  dream is probably the closest we will ever get to a definite answer. I like this interpretation the best as long as they keep it sort of vague and nebulous.

  18. Posted

    3 hours ago, dartmonkey said:

    I agree that perhaps BOB's influence has changed - the season 2 ending very explicitly highlighted his presence in the doppelgänger - but the 'good man like Leland' interpretation is something I disagree with. Chris and Jake have discussed it on the 'cast (and people on the forums too) and there's no evidence to say Leland is blameless and 'good'. If BOB is a manifestation of the 'evil that men do', it is (WO)MEN that must create conditions for him to exist in them. He's not a bogeyman who inhabits hapless innocents. He couldn't inhabit Laura, for example, although there are scenes where she appears to be succumbing to that evil (when she's on the stairway in FWWM) and at risk of letting him in.

     

    My immediate thought (and I guess that of many viewers) on watching the S2 finale was that BadCoop and BOB would begin a spree of devious, violent attacks, starting with Annie and probably moving through the entire Miss Twin Peaks lineup. I think FWWM and S3 introduced more subtle and complicated motivations for BadCoop and BOB, and it would be a shame if the audiences' assumptions were indulged rather than being subverted in any way.

    It's pretty clear in the show that Leland wasn't even aware of his actions until the very end when BOB "pulled the ripchord".. I don't know how much more blameless you can get. Sure there has to be some darkness for BOB to enter, that much is clear. But I have no trouble believing that if it weren't for BOB possessing him (and remember this happened when he was very young, like 12 or something), he would have gone on to be a perfectly descent man. There's no way to know that for sure, but his final speech makes things lean HEAVILY in that direction. It's kind of the whole point of that end for him. He seems so childlike and innocent and just GOOD in those final moments. He finally lets go of the darkness and goes towards the light, free of BOB and at peace and with Laura. FWWM plays with that  notion a bit, mostly for dramatic reasons I think, I mean imagine if Leland had been a raving lunatic that whole film, it just wouldn't have worked the same way. Even though we as the audience already knew he was possessed by BOB, it would be too obvious, particularly to Laura and the other characters, if they made it so cut and dried. But I don't think there are many people who could say Leland wasn't deep down a good person.

  19. Posted

    17 hours ago, Invisible Strings said:

    I just want to say for the record that TP Rewatch is my favorite podcast. I really enjoy the personality and the insights and the articulate thoughts you guys bring to these discussions. It has been difficult to find another place with TP conversation that is this enjoyable. Thanks to Chris and Jake.

    I agree. When the episode is over, I'm always anxious for the podcast to be posted a few days later. IT'S SO GOOD! :-)
    Gonna miss the podcast and these forum discussions almost as much as the show when this is all over. Twin Peaks is such a  good show for theorizing and discussing this stuff. I only know one person who has been keeping up who I can talk to in real life, so this forum/podcast has really filled a big void in talking about this stuff.

    Hopefully we still get that whole season retrospective thing you guys mentioned (I think?) a few weeks ago. Can't wait.

  20. Posted

    22 hours ago, Ash_NR said:

    Yeah I am disappointed by the use of rape as flippant shorthand for badness. I always saw BOB as impulsiveness and hedonism. I saw it intermingled within Leland as an almost symbiotic relationship to feed off Leland's depraved desires.

     

    BadCoop is not Leland and not simply BOB, BadCoop this season has enacted a complex plan to ensure that he stays in this world. He is guided by his needs, not wants, which again doesn't feel like BOB. He is also someone that appears at least to me to have a regular, consensual sexual relationship with Chantal.

    The implication of BadCoop raping both Audrey and Diane echoes more of a BOB/Leland relationship. I can't imagine the nature of BOB is something we'll get out of the final 2 hours.

    If a good man like Leland can be driven to rape his own daughter, a truly evil character like Mr. C is not that much of a stretch. Especially if he hadn't quite wrestled the reins away from BOB in the beginning. I can see it taking years for his own personality to take over and become the dominant personality. I look back at the end of season 2 and I see a much different character than the one we have now. Much more like BOB. As he took over, he became more cold and logical, almost the opposite of BOB in a way since passions don't rule him. But he's still evil, and only out for himself. At this point in the story, BOB is more of a tool so he can have super human abilities than a part of his personality. Perhaps it can make sense that in the beginning he would behave like a serial rapist with purely hedonistic impulses whose only motive is to cause fear and to feed on it, but over the course of 25 years he became the more calculating, and truly formidable Mr. C that we have today. His goal now is self-preservation at any cost.

     

    4 hours ago, Mike Danger said:

    Doesn't Bad Coop refer to Hutch as "your husband' when he meets Chantal in the motel after killing Darya?

    Is Hutch a confirmed cuck? If this is true, I love it. I've kind of always been confused about what the exact nature of their relationship was.

  22. Posted

    11 hours ago, Jake said:

     

    To say season 3 is "about" those things on anything but a plot level is disingenuous. I'd argue, at least up through the episodes we've seen which is all anyone can argue about, that the story and feeling and character motivations of the season would be unchanged if the rape pieces of plot-fill were removed. That's absolutely not true for the Laura Palmer story (seasons 1.5 and FWWM). Those stories and those parts of Twin Peaks are truly "about" what you say, while I think in Season 3 Bad Cooper is written as a rapist as a device to add more notches to his "he's a bad character" belt, and it's otherwise disposable. 

     

    To me, thematic injections of that type into Bad Coop are fanon, are wishing there was more there than there is. We still have two more chapters so I guess we'll see, but so far the show hasn't seemed concerned with more than lip service to the themes and concepts you're describing, when Bad Coop is concerned. 


    The show isn't only about those things. But it is about those things. The dark parts of it at least. People forget how dark and disturbing the original was, and how much it relied on that stuff to be disturbing. It may not have been as graphic or violent, but it was just as scary and disturbing as FWWM and The Return. 

  24. Posted

    16 hours ago, WickedCestus said:

    I was disappointed that the theories about Mr. C raping Diane and likely also Audrey were confirmed. I don't know how I feel about it, necessarily. For the most part, the fact that Mr. C is evil has been expressed in this show through his mistreatment of women, from Darya to Diane. It's very uncomfortable. I mean, it's supposed to be uncomfortable. Still trying to reckon with myself how I feel about this, because generally I dislike stories that rely so heavily on themes of abuse and gratuitous violence. I will continue to read everyone's thoughts about this on our forum here, because I think there have been plenty of interesting discussions about this up until now. 

     

    This show has always been about rape and violence and the horrific things people are capable of. It's the darkness of BOB and what these evil lodge creatures are capable of that makes them so terrifying. If they avoided things like that, it would have no teeth, and the bad guys would be like cartoons. 

    Having some evil version of you running around doing such horrible things like rape and murdering people.. it's just unthinkable. it's the worst kind of violation. people you love now think you did this to them. I can't think of anything worse.

    Some of the best things about FWWM were about Laura dealing with and coming to realize the abuse she suffered at the hands of her own father. It's precisely what made that movie so great. It's uncomfortable, but Twin Peaks is one of the few shows that explores these things and does it well. I think so anyways.. The original run sort of danced around it a bit more, I suspect because it was a prime time show on ABC and not HBO Showtime. There's probably only so much dark and mature themes they could get away with in the early nineties on network TV. But even then, they still addressed it often, and they did a good job at it. It never seemed contrived or gratuitous or exploitative or anything like that. I don't think The Return has either.